I'm not here to speculate on whether Edge's source is reliable, but I will say I'm not going to believe anything I hear about the next generation of consoles unless it's coming directly from the companies themselves. Rather, I want to talk about why this news item cannot be true, at least by the time the console is ready for public release.

The idea behind killing used game sales is a relatively straightforward one. It's a simple, multi-stage process that ends up with those who made the game getting the short end of the stick.

- Gamestop sells a new game for $60, they get a fraction, the publisher gets a fraction, the developer gets a fraction, and so on.

- A customer sells that game back to Gamestop a month later for $20.

- Gamestop sells that game to another customer for $40, pocking $20 in pure profit while the publishers and developers get nothing from what is essentially a second sale.

The used games market is enormous, particularly in this rough economy, and it's a huge part of the reason GameStop has managed to thrive in an age where Blockbusters and Barnes and Nobles are closing left and right.

It makes sense why developers and publishers want to be paid for copies of their own game, but at what cost? What would Microsoft have to give up to implement something like this?

Even when this was just a mere rumor, the internet was flooded with comments on forums and message boards saying that if the next generation Xbox did in fact come with such a restriction, they would automatically buy whatever Sony put out.

The truth is, there isn't all that much space between Sony and Microsoft's consoles, at least not in their current form, and many feel that may continue into the future. Yes, Microsoft has a few exclusive franchises Sony doesn't, but it also has ruffled feathers for charging an arm and a leg for Xbox Live. By instituting a policy that would eliminate used games for the system entirely, that could be enough to send a lot of people over the edge and into the arms of their competitors for good.

But what if this is part of some grand conspiracy in the next console generation, and Sony is in on it as well? What if the two companies sign a blood pact with the intent to eliminate used games sales altogether? Well, that wouldn't quite work either, as Nintendo's Wii U already has no such restriction, and gamers could embrace them instead. Additionally, if this "Steam Box" ever comes to fruition, it would be in a prime place to take advantage of all those who want cheap games, but can no longer get them on consoles.

Many, many people primarily buy used games for their systems, due to the fact that they are often significantly cheaper than new copies. Many would probably not play video games at all unless they could get these titles for cheap, or sell back their own games to help pay for new ones. Not to mention the fact that this move would be effectively declaring outright war on GameStop. Sure they sell used games, but they also sell new ones, and if their stock is dropping when this is just a rumor, what happens if it's a reality? That's a longstanding alliance they probably wouldn't want to shatter. GameStop is none too pleased with even whispers of news like this, and responded in kind yesterday to the rumor via a spokesman:

“We know the desire to purchase a next-generation console would be significantly diminished if new consoles were to prohibit playing pre-owned games, limit portability or not play new physical games.”

That's the gist of what I'm saying here, and it's been met by a firm "no comment" from Microsoft.

Even if console manufacturers did want to go full steam ahead with this, the only way it would work would be if prices of new games started falling quickly after release, or at least far faster than they do currently. The companies would have to match the equivalent price of whatever the games could be sold for used at GameStop in order to attract customers. But would the revenue loss on fully priced $60 used titles offset that sort of move as prices fall? That's unclear, and it might not be worth it for Sony or Microsoft.

Lastly, I just don't buy this idea that used games hurt more than they help. How many people have gotten into a game series by picking up an older game for cheap at the store? How many people have bought a new game because they sold back four of their old ones? How many have discovered a new franchise they love after borrowing a game from their friend? These avenues would be effectively eliminated, and such a move could hamstring either a specific system (Xbox in this case), or the entire concept of consoles if they all colluded to eradicate used games sales.

And do we really have to go with other analogies here? Publishers and developers can often come off as wrongly lamenting an idea that's been a part of the economy for as long as there's been an economy. When you buy something, you own it, and you can resell it to whoever you choose. Does Apple need a cut when I sell my buddy my last-gen iPod for $50? Does Ford demand cash when I put my 2009 Fusion on the market after paying for it in full myself? This idea seems contrary to common sense, though as we move into the digital age, there might not be such a thing as "secondhand products" anymore. But there are now, and until there aren't, this can't happen.

I don't believe the rumor, but even if I did, I can't imagine it's an idea that will make it past a "what if" concept. And it shouldn't.